by Malcolm Falloon | 31 Jan , 2025 | About Christianity, Articles, Christianity and Social & Moral Issues, Christianity in New Zealand
The current debate as to the meaning and interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi has focussed on the “principles” of the Treaty. Yet, many New Zealanders in previous generations were more interested in understanding the “spirit” of the Treaty. It could be argued that this is a more foundational question that should be allowed to shape on-going discussions of how the Treaty can be applied today. Just as in sport, there can be a difference between the interpretation of the rules and the spirit of the game – as was all too apparent in the “under-arm bowling” incident that occurred in the 1981 One-Day International between Australia and New Zealand. As in this example, it is usually the rules that need to change in order to preserve the spirit in which the game is played.
But how is the “spirit” of the Treaty to be defined? To answer this question, it is helpful to look at the wider context of the signing of the Treaty rather than focussing solely on the text of the Treaty itself. In this regard, three features of the ceremonial context in which the Treaty was first enacted can be highlighted: Hobson’s greeting,; Patuone’s gift,; and the distribution of treaty blankets.
Hobson’s greeting
As each rangatira signed the treaty, Governor Hobson shook their hand and said, “He iwi tahi tatou” (We are one people). This whakataukī (significant saying) apparently delighted Māori, but what would they have understood by it? In the first instance, Māori would have recognised a confirmation of Henry Williams’ explanation. Williams, the leading Anglican missionary, had told them that by signing, “they would become one people with the English… under one Sovereign, one Law, human and divine.” But for many Māori, the words would also have resonated deeply with the Bible: “For Christ is our peace, having made both groups [Jew and Gentile] into one.” (Ephesians 2:14). Hobson’s greeting linked the sacred and the secular in a way that would have made perfect sense to Māori of the day.
Patuone’s gift
After the signing, Patuone, a leading Ngā Puhi rangatira and peacemaker, stepped forward and presented Hobson with a greenstone hand weapon, a mere pounamu, intended expressly for Queen “Wikitoria”. Felton Mathew, a member of Hobson’s entourage and the one who reported the gift, recognised the value of such a rare taonga, but seemed unaware of its deeper significance. Namely, that rangatira who wished to make peace with an enemy would send their mere pounamu to their opponent, who, by accepting it, would establish an enduring peace between their hostile iwi. Consequently, the 500 or so Māori who gathered to witness the signing would not have missed the significance of Patuone’s gift. If the act of signing the Treaty sealed the agreement from a British standpoint, the presentation of the mere pounamu by Patuone was its cultural equivalent from a Māori perspective. It was a fitting response to Hobson’s greeting and linked the Treaty to traditional practices of peacemaking.
Treaty blankets
At the end of the ceremony, Hobson asked the missionary printer, William Colenso, to distribute a bale of blankets and a cask of tobacco to all those who signed. It was an exchange viewed with cynicism by later generations of settlers, who resented what they called the ‘blanket treaty’. Yet to see this distribution as merely a bribe to “naked savages” is to be insensitive to the cultural protocols involved. Hobson, with his western sensibilities, had been careful to withhold any gifts until the ceremony was completed, and yet, to have not offered a koha would have been interpreted as a deliberate insult within a culture that placed such importance on reciprocity and hospitality. In later years, the red treaty blankets were worn as a mark of distinction by Māori rangatira in much the same way that the grey missionary blanket had earlier demonstrated a willingness to listen to the missionary karakia. For Māori, what you wore was an important indication of your beliefs and allegiances. “Give me a blanket that I might believe!” was perplexing to the missionary who was looking for an inward conversion of the heart, but it reminds us that for a number of early converts the social expression of faith was just as important as its profession; how can you believe if disconnected from the community of faith by your very appearance? Hence, Māori enthusiasm for treaty blankets was not a sign of short-sighted avarice, but of a newly-formed allegiance and a continuing recognition of the agreement.
If the spiritual dimension of the treaty was important to all those involved in its first signing, it continues to enrich our understanding of the document even in this secularising age. For just as a marriage license cannot fully express the intentions of the happy couple, the “spirit” of the Treaty cannot be confined to the legal dissection of written texts, however important that may be. In 1934, at the dedication of the Waitangi Treaty grounds, the first Māori Bishop, Fredrick Bennett, urged New Zealanders never to forget the Treaty’s spiritual side. That spirit he defined as “unity and peace between the Pakeha and Māori for all time”. His definition follows naturally as a succinct summary of Hobson’s greeting and Patuone’s gift. And as we heed the Bishop’s call, may we as a nation continue to cloak our life together in the spiritual blanket that is the Treaty of Waitangi.
by Dr Stuart Lange | 16 Dec , 2024 | About Christianity, Articles, Christianity in New Zealand
Christian people, like everyone else, are exposed to a range of cultural traditions and societal pressures about how to celebrate Christmas. Some of those Christmas patterns are compatible with Christian faith, and some head off in other directions.
So how can Christians mark Christmas in a way that honours Christ?
Here are some suggestions:
- Ensure that the message of Jesus is central to Christmas. Think and talk about that message, where you are. Here’s some scriptures to get us going: “For God so loved the world that he sent his Son…” (John 3:16), “God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself” (2 Cor. 5:19), “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14), “I bring you good news of great joy, for to you is born this day a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord” (Luke 2:14).
- Make it a priority to go to church on Christmas Eve and/or Christmas Day, if possible. Take others with you.
- Over the next week or so, support all those Christian public outreaches that showcase the Christian meaning of Christmas.
- Have some quality time with family, friends, and others we can invite along. Love, kindness, respect, and hospitality reflect the heart of Jesus (family tensions and upsets work the other way).
- Don’t get too carried away with providing vast amounts of food (excess food is a burden, and not necessary).
- Don’t get carried away with drinking (things can go downhill).
- Santa is not our message. Despite the tenuous link with 4th century traditions about St. Nicholas, Father Christmas and elves and flying reindeer from a factory at the North Pole are all a modern construct, calibrated to assist manufacturers and retailers and encourage a huge annual public spending spree. Consider downplaying or dispensing with Santa.
- Don’t get too carried away with gifts. Don’t make them central, or a financial burden. Adults may want to agree on limits, or agree not to do gifts.
- After Christmas, factor in time for rest and recreation, the enjoyment of God’s creation, spiritual refreshment and thanksgiving, and prayer about God’s directions for us in the new year.
by Dr Stuart Lange | 29 Nov , 2024 | About Christianity, Articles, Christianity in New Zealand
There is a very wide range of understandings in church and society – and among historians too – about the precise meaning and implications of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi. The Treaty Principles Bill is highly political and has stirred up a great many Māori. Some of the rhetoric on the extremes of both sides has been unhelpful. We can thank God, though, that the very large hikoi was so peaceful, as promised.
New Zealand Christian Network, as a Christian unity movement, must of course be politically non-aligned. But we suggest that as Christians most of us can probably agree that:
- the background to the Treaty/Te Tiriti was Christian humanitarian concern to protect Māori from the harmful effects of uncontrolled colonial settlement and injustice
- Māori signed the Treaty/Te Tiriti in good faith, trusting the missionary assurances that the British Crown would govern with justice
- in Article 1 of the Treaty/Te Tiriti, Māori agreed to governance by the Crown
- in Article 2, the Crown guaranteed to Māori chiefs (and by implication their people) the retention of the rights they already had, including tino rangatiratanga (chiefly mana and self-determination), and their lands, fisheries, and treasures
- in Article 3, the Crown gave Māori the same rights and privileges as British citizens – another guarantee to Māori that they would be protected in law by the British Crown, rather than subjugated and treated as less than equal
- many Māori came to see the Treaty/Te Tiriti as akin to a sacred covenant between themselves and the Crown
- the Treaty/Te Tiriti was significantly breached by the Crown, as the colonial government bowed to pressure from land-hungry settlers, and as New Zealand became numerically and culturally dominated by Pākehā
- as Christians we recognise the importance of justice and redress
- as Christians we utterly reject any form of racism, from any quarter
- as Christians we recognise both the intrinsic equality of all human beings and also respect cultural distinctives
- as Christians we honour the unique provisions of the Treaty/Te Tiriti
- as Christians we should be committed to inter-cultural reconciliation, respect, and aroha
Christians making submissions on this (or any other) Bill
It can be a bit frustrating making a submission on a parliamentary Bill, as the outcomes of the Select Committee process can often appear largely politically pre-determined.
It is still good, however, for some Christians to speak up on legislative issues that have spiritual and ethical implications, and make written and even in-person submissions. We live in a democracy, and Christians have both a right and a responsibility to advocate for what we believe is right and express our cautions against what we believe is wrong. We do so because we care for the common good, and because Christian perspectives – which will vary – need to be part of the mix.
If as Christians we do speak up, we need to do so in a way that commends rather than discredits our Christian faith and values. We need to communicate with truth and love, respect and humility, and sound reasoning, and not with rancour or hostility. Over the years, many Christians have made excellent submissions on a great number of important issues.
by Dr Stuart Lange | 11 Nov , 2024 | About Christianity, Articles, Christianity in New Zealand
USA elections, in a wider perspective
The upside of democracy is that every few years the people get to choose their own leaders. Some people usually vote the same, some don’t. But governmental change happens whenever a majority become disgruntled with how things are, and vote for someone else in the hope that matters may improve under new leadership. With every election result, however, a very considerable minority are disappointed.
Every human leader has their own strengths and weaknesses, faults and blind spots. Rhetoric does not always reflect reality.
Only time will tell what effects the second Trump presidency may have on the world economy, on international security, peace and war, the health of the environment, and on various contested issues such as religious freedom, respect for all cultures, transgenderism, and the rights of the unborn.
God alone understands the big picture in this world. Our role as believers is to pray for our troubled world, and for those in authority, and to live our own lives with love for God and others, faithful in Christ, and renewed by the Holy Spirit.
In New Zealand, the Treaty Principles debate
In New Zealand, as part of the coalition agreement, the Act Party’s ‘Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill’ has now been introduced. The Bill will lead to much-heated debate. The Bill is not supported by any other party, so it will not proceed into law.
Whatever meanings we may discern in Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi, those meanings should be firmly anchored in what the Treaty was historically intended to achieve, and what its articles say.
The Treaty arose out of Christian humanitarian concern to protect Māori from colonial injustice, through Māori agreeing to the British Crown taking authority within New Zealand (Article 1); through the Crown fully respecting Māori rights, chiefly authority, and land ownership (Article 2); and through the Crown guaranteeing Māori all the rights and privileges of British citizenship (Article 3). The Treaty was a civil document, but has nevertheless been regarded by many Māori as akin to a sacred covenant. It needs to be honoured.
We can pray that the discussions may result in a greater understanding and consensus in these matters, and that Christians may contribute well into the discussion.
by Dr Stuart Lange | 11 Oct , 2024 | About Christianity, Articles, Christianity in New Zealand
In the just-released 2023 census results, two key figures stand out in relation to “religion”:
1. For the first time, slightly over half of New Zealanders (51.6%) now identify as having ‘”no religion”.
2. The percentage of New Zealand people who identify themselves in the 2023 census as Christian is 32.3%, down from 36.5% in 2018.
What are we to make of all this?
The reduction in Christian affiliation is consistent with the pattern over many decades, of roughly a 1% reduction every year, and a 5% drop every five years.
While one in every two New Zealanders now professes “no religion”, over one-third are still happy to identify as Christian (and some of those will be very committed Christians).
The ongoing growth in “no religion” reflects the pervasive effect on New Zealand society of the prevailing beliefs of Western culture: things like scepticism, postmodern relativism, and the priority of self, pleasure, and individual choice. The dominant narratives in Western society are no longer Christian. Being actively Christian is becoming more counter-cultural. Whereas Christianity was once the default setting for many people in New Zealand, and many families sent their children to Sunday Schools and church youth groups, that is no longer so, and secularised families raise secular descendants.
Arguably, secular Western cultural ideas have also significantly weakened the Church itself. Some Christians and churches have diminished confidence in the truth of Christian beliefs, in the Bible, and in the necessity of evangelism. The teaching and discipleship of churches has generally not been robust enough to counter secular pressures. Many children raised in Christian families lose their faith, and disengage from church. Also, not enough Christians and churches in New Zealand are active or effective in evangelism. As a result of all that, the Church in New Zealand has too many people drifting out, and not enough coming in. If the Church in New Zealand could be stronger in its confidence in the Gospel, in teaching and discipleship, and evangelism, it would be in considerably better shape.
Globally, Christianity is growing. But not currently in New Zealand. Even in New Zealand, though, God is still at work, and the Gospel remains the power of God for salvation. Many people are still open to God, and the Holy Spirit still delights to move in the hearts of unbelievers and bring them to faith and wholeness in Christ. And God can still breathe upon the Church, and powerfully renew it, and raise up new individuals and movements and generations of vibrant faith.
The early church did not worry about being a minority in a hostile society. They just got on with being authentically Christian: believing, praying, discipling, caring, and evangelising.
This is not a time for Christians in New Zealand to wring their hands in despair. This is a time for humble, honest reflection before God, and for serious prayer. Not prayer that God will make New Zealand thoroughly “Christian” (it never was, and never will be), or that God will improve the census figures, but prayer that we Christians will be more faithful, that God will refresh and revive the Church, and that many more people in New Zealand will find new life in Jesus.
by Malcolm Falloon | 25 Sep , 2024 | About Christianity, Articles, Christianity and Social & Moral Issues
I urge you to take a few minutes to respond to the government questionnaire on the End of Life Choice Act. I have just filled it out it myself. Public consultation in the form of the survey closes 5 pm on Thursday 26 September 2024. The questionnaire can be accessed here.
The euphemistically named End of Life Choice Act was passed in 2019 and is now up for review. As part of the review process, the public are invited to answer a series of ten questions. The questions are straightforward and took me about 30 minutes to answer – I like to give full answers! But if you simply want to state your opinion, and say yes or no, filling out the questionnaire will take much less time. So why not complete it now?
In filling out the questionnaire, I found it helpful to re-acquaint myself with the issues involved. To that end, Family First have put together a webpage with information, helpful links, and opinions from a Christian point-of-view. They also list the questions you will be asked in the questionnaire and give sample answers here (use them to help form your ideas, but if you just copy them your response is likely to be discounted as a “form” response).
Reading through the material, many Christians will be concerned that the Act has had a lethal (literally) impact on many vulnerable people over the past five years. For me, it is of particular concern that 99% of those who chose to end their lives did so without any referral for psychiatric assessment. That raises serious questions as to how many of those who made decisions to end their lives did so primarily in response to an underlying mental health issue or due to a misplaced desire not to burden family or an under-resourced health system?
Having been in pastoral ministry for over thirty years, I know how precious the last few months/years of a person’s life can be. Once the shock of having received a terminal diagnosis is overcome, the time remaining becomes, in fact, a wonderful gift – both to the person concerned and to their families. It is amazing how much of value and significance can be passed on to others when we know the time is short.
In the end, only God knows the number of our days. Doctors rightly attempt to give us a realistic prognosis, but even their predictions must bow before the sovereign will of our loving and merciful Creator. My only conclusion: “my times are in your hands” (Psalm 31:15).
